Atheist fired for self-identifying on internet message boards

I think this story should serve as a warning for all of us, atheist or theist alike.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/28/catholic-school-fires-math-teacher-who-may-not-believe-in-god/">Catholic School Fires Math Teacher Who May Not Believe in God

A math teacher who said in an online survey that she did not believe in God has been fired by an Iowa Catholic school after her views were discovered on her Facebook profile and after officials found she had posted a comment at an atheist website.

Last August the teacher, 27-year-old Abby Nurre, who had just been hired to teach eight-grade math at St. Edmond School in Fort Dodge, checked "no" in a Facebook survey about whether she believed in God, heaven and angels. Then in November she posted a link to a news article about federal funding of research on prayer in an online discussion forum run by atheists.

In December, five weeks after that posting, a student brought printouts of the websites to school officials, and Nurre was fired. The Catholic school, backed by the bishops of Iowa, also sought to deny Nurre unemployment benefits, which prompted a court hearing that concluded in her favor this week. She will still not be able to return to St. Edmond School, however.

She shouldn't have added any of her students as her friend, in my opinion. But what is so objectionable about this that she should be fired and potentially denied unemployment.

In the Iowa case, Nurre was confronted last December by Monsignor Kevin McCoy, head of the Sioux City diocesan school system, with evidence of her Facebook survey response and the comment she posted on Atheist Nexus.

At the meeting, Arlt said, McCoy asked Nurre point-blank if she believed in God. According to Arlt, Nurre said she did not, and that she stood by her two web postings. The teacher was suspended from her position and barred from school grounds for making "atheist statements in a public forum," according to an account in the Des Moines Register.

A few days later, the school's board fired her, saying she violated a policy that prohibits employees from advocating "principles contrary to the dogmatic and moral teaching of the church."

Nurre challenged the board's ruling in January, but it upheld the original decision.

To make matters worse for Nurre, the school and the Iowa Catholic Conference -- which is the lobbying arm of the state's four bishops -- then sought to deny Nurre's application for unemployment benefits.

I'm kind of torn on this. My company, like a lot of companies, forbids its employees from criticizing the company on line as an employee. In other words, saying "I'm Modem Butterfly and as an employee, I know for a fact that every time you buy from XYZ company a kitten dies. I would know this because, as I said, I work there," But if my company made and sold widgets and I said, "Widgets probably aren't necessary and they suck anyway," I wouldn't be terminated.

Be careful what you attach your name to on the Internet, especially if you have a minority opinion that incites prejudicial rage.

Holy cow! I can't believe anyone with an opinion outside the mainstream can defend someone getting fired for expressing a different opinion. Don't people realize that it's a short step between firing someone for being an atheist and firing someone for supporting Obama in their spare time.

What do you think would happen to Michael Steele if it came out that he was supporting Obama in his spare time?

:shrug:

Seriously, many of them aren't even comfortable with the fact that he's "a black" like our President. I would like to think that we're better than them.

if he said he was supporting a Republican in his spare time?

Hence the Michael Steele comparison. However, it can be applied to any Democratic party official who supports a Republican in their spare time if you prefer. The argument is the same.

All that matters is that she teaches the subject well. Especially in math.

I don't care if they have the right to fire her. They're repressive whack jobs.

- they have the right and the ability to discharge those who do not agree with their religious doctrine as part of the education in a private Catholic school is that very doctrine.

It's just facts and reality. Bigotry has nothing to do with it.

Think about this for a minute: would you think this was okay if the teacher was Jewish?

This is a perfect example of it. It's a private Catholic school that obviously requires their teachers to hold a belief in God. I'm sure there was a contract that she signed stating such. Look up bona fide occupational qualification.

Should they be allowed to fire any teachers seen buying condoms? How about any teacher who has been divorced? Any teacher who is Jewish, or Muslim, or Protestant?

They found out it violated the standards the school has. Yes she can legally be fired for not believing in God at a private Catholic school.

Again, look up bona fide occupational qualification.

All she did was answer a Facebook survey. She didn't march, or advertise her beliefs. Certainly she never proselytized for atheism. In fact, she didn't even teach a subject where a belief in a god, gods, or goddesses was even germaine- she taught math. Face it. She was fired for a thought crime. And just because it's not explicitly forbidden doesn't mean that it's okay.

Or fire someone that converted to Judaism.

Again, look up bona fide occupational qualification.

she knew it was expected of her. it was not an unknown to her. if it was, she would not have pretended to pray to something she does not believe in.

somewhere in it all she said she participated in it.

... off school property and off school time, she would have a job right now.

If the teacher then admits to not believing in God then they can be fired. Businesses are allowed to discriminate this way, it's covered under bona fide occupational qualification.

They already have explicit exemptions carved into the code for them.

Section 702(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-1(a), provides:

This subchapter shall not apply to . . . a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities.

Section 703(e)(2) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)(2) provides:

it shall not be an unlawful employment practice for a school, college, university, or educational institution or institution of learning to hire and employ employees of a particular religion if such school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of learning is, in whole or in substantial part, owned, supported, controlled, or managed by a particular religion or by a particular religious corporation, association, or society, or if the curriculum of such school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of learning is directed toward the propagation of a particular religion.

http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html#_ftn42

Little shitweasel Dubya extended the exemptions to federally funded faith based charities, naturally.

:)

then she would have her job right now.

yes.

you are correct

she should have continued to keep her mouth shut, or as she expected, lose her job

And if you're fired on Tuesday for posting on DU on your private computer on your personal time, well then it would be your fault that you didn't keep your mouth shut.

being available to all.

i teach my kids the same thing.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-05-29-fired28_ST_N.htm">"She should be denied unemployment benefits for being a member of an atheist Web site,"

impose themselves on their employees personal lives.

repercussions depending on what i put on a non private internet.

i am the fool. i am a fool because i know other people read the internet. i am a fool because i know depending what i put out can effect me.

what a hoot

They knew she wasn't Catholic, and if you look down thread, you'll see a link to the Diocese employment application on which there are no questions regarding the applicant's regligion OR belief in a higher power.

to me, when you dont believe in a god yet pretend by your actions, that you believe in a god.

so the facts prove you wrong.

i have no issue with her getting unemployment. sometimes an employee is just not worth it, knowing the employer is going to have to pay unemployment, they still fire.

this isnt about whether she should get unemployment or not.

this is about whether she should be able to be fired because her lack of religion interferred with her job.

regardless though, your reasoning is unreasonable. the facts are she pretended to have faith thru praying and other rites. she stated she does not have faith

those are the facts.

Are the other non-Catholic teachers employed by the school pretending to be Catholic by participating in the same events? Just because she was physically present when prayers were said, doesn't it doesn't mean she prayed. If I'm at a wake and present in the room when the priest comes in to lead the prayers, I bow my head out of respect but I don't pray. The same rule applies for funeral masses I attend. If she was required to attend masses with her class and she did so, she was merely fulfilling one of her job requirements.

is irrelevant. this one obviously wasnt. thirdly, if she had been honest in the first place and taken the chance on being hired with adm knowing she did not believe, then she would not have had to pretend.

have you read the privates schools rules of employment? i havent. the only private christian school i have been involved in had participation rules. you agreed to them. if you did not honor them, you were kicked out. we made the choice of being a part of the school, or not.

is not required of teachers. Her lack of belief in God isn't any different than a Lutheran teacher's (the school admits to having teachers who are Lutheran, which is why I chose that example)lack of belief in transubstantiation. Participating means she was present, you're the one reading into it. I explained to you up thread how it's possible for an atheist to "participate" in such events. That she did participate shows she didn't make her beliefs an issue at work. I haven't read the rules of employment, but I have seen the Diocese application for employment and religion isn't mentioned AT ALL.

just a general christian belief. again, not out in left field here.

If Christianity were a job requirement, why wouldn't that be addressed on the employment application? Yesterday I demonstrated that there are Catholic schools that do hire non-Christians. Why do you think your anecdotal assertions are more valid than mine?

since they fired her because she does not believe in god, then obviously they have issue with her not believing in god. or.... having been in the work environment in such a way they feel a betrayal or lie in behavior and dont respect her. or they are merely using it to let her go because they did not think she adequately filled the role.... who the fuck knows. all of it is a guess.

as far as application of employment, they are pretty standard. most businesses has a rule of conduct that is gone over after the person is hired and is to sign. this is generally the rules to follow to work in a company, not on a stand employment application. surely in all of your wisdom and experience you have this knowledge. pretty common place

what makes my anecdotal more valid than yours is the woman was fired for stating she doesn't believe in god that is contradictive to the goal of her place of employment.

yet the school tolerates that contradiction.

peace

Even though they are expected to recite it, and sometimes face punishment when they do not?

that it's not solely the kids who are being stupid about displaying their lives on Facebook.

Maybe it takes incidents like these to teach people: Don't put anything on a social networking site that you wouldn't put on a billboard that was right over your house.

:shrug:

And I don't mean better qualified to teach at a Catholic school. I mean better, period.

I'd say that is indicative of their standards being off.

"Should they be allowed to fire any teachers seen buying condoms? "

There have been a number of cases where teachers have been fired for using birth control while working a private catholic school.

... he should be allowed to have his say.

They couldn't fire someone for being a homophobe, even if he claimed it was his Xian religion, so long as he doesn't engage in misconduct.

How different do you think your thread would be, though, if you substituted HMHS for St. Edmond's and homophobia for atheism?

with a school that serves LGBT students.

But I was wrong. So, what is your point? That a teacher must not express a belief/non-belief unless it is pre-approved by his employer?

I don't think Ms. Nurre's termination was justified at all and I'm quite horrified that people here are defending it.

Would it be okay for the Democratic Party not to hire Republicans?

Do private, say, message boards get to pick and choose its members?

Although it'd be interested to be randomly assigned to a forum.

- a good part of what the parents are paying tuition for in this school is an education in the Catholic faith and Christianity. In this situation, the teacher's faith is a hiring requirement.

If a teacher was of Jewish descent but of Catholic or Christian faith, they should be qualified to teach there. If the teacher was of Jewish or any other faith they would not meet the employment requirements.

...Or at least his idea that private business should be allowed to discriminate. Oh well, this is further proof this country is going down hill quick!

If not, then let's call it Bob Jones Prep. If so, they need to stop discriminating right this minute!!!

n/t

So theyre okay with fucking little boys but not with atheists teaching math. I dont care what their right are, the parents are bigots and fools for allowing their children to be taught in a religious environment, and it's my right to call them bigots, so go ahead and brainwash another generation. They are being taxed right?

you to keep working if you publicly profess a philosophy completely inconsistent with your company's core values?...oh, maybe a very low level position would let it slip, but not for one second would it be allowed in a more public level position.

After all, companies are all about capitalism. So is it okay for people who express support for socialist ideas and/or politicians to be fired?

Name an avowed communist in the US who is the head of a Fortune 500 company..


and to answer your question...yes, and would be if they make a public spectacle of themselves..again maybe with the exception of the entry level jobs...which is where they will stay if they are, say, pictured on the front page of a local news blog burning an American flag, whilst exposing their genitalia because it is the right thing to do.

I can just imagine how the voucher advocates would shit bricks.

works for coke, but brings pepsi to work.

a male wants a job at the strip joint.

a christian wants to work in the synagogue

a pharmacist doesn't want to fill a birth control prescription cause they are anti abortion.

check out all the anti-religion threads they post & the lambastings they give anyone who states they believe in God.

dg

the religious get their panties in a wad about being "oppressed" on DU. And anytime a religious organization does something stupid, discriminatory, or hateful, there are always those who defend it unto death practically. So can the hysterics, ok?

Just one religious DUer saying they are "oppressed" by someone stating they lack faith in God? Should be easy considering the frequency with which you say it happens.

If you want, I could link to many different threads from R/T.

It seems to me that the religious on this board want it one of two ways, first, they want Atheists and the like to be silent, and then they want to be free to discriminate against them in real life, harass them, etc.

Please link to me one post wherein a religious DUer is offended by the mere statement of lack of belief in God. Not by being called a name or by a childish comment about "sky daddies" or the like, but by--as you claimed--the mere statement by an atheist that they are an atheist. I've never seen it, personally. By and by, being offended and claiming persecution is not, at all, "more or less the same."

She KNEW the risks about letting her views be known. She should have gone to work for a public school, rather then a private school who's main ideals are contrary to her own.

Conservatives seem to always blame the victim. But I expect more from others. Conservatives seem to live in a world void of empathy or compassion. But others should not follow their repulsive lead. When you blame the victim you too might soon find yourself in their position with others condemning you.

What a sad world when people don't go to the defense of those who have been victimized.

quicker than they can pick up the phone and order a pizza.

It's stupid to think you can diss your employer in public, and get away with it. I'm atheist, too, and if I tried to help any church in it's mission to deceive the public, no matter how unrelated to that mission my little piece was, I'd expect to be fired if I hid my true feelings from them when getting employed.

She just answered a questionnaire saying she didn't believe in god.

when your employer's very existence depends on people passionately believing not only in one, but in their exclusive version of that deity, making them the gatekeepers to that god, yeah, that's dissing the employer.

I'm a fully recovered Catholic, and the Church is not a democracy, it's really the last surviving major monarchy, when you get down to it. They haven't evolved that much from the mentality of the Spanish Inquisition, even though they've changed tactics.

If the school requires belief in Catholicism and fired her for not being a Catholic, they may be in legal trouble. They are on record saying they thought she was a Lutheran. Under Title VII, a religious employer can giving preference to employees who share their religion, not discriminate against one person who has no religion. They are on record saying that they employ people of other religions, including Lutherans. To object to only one type of non-Catholic would seem to be a violation of Title VII.

then perhaps she can find a lawyer and make a case. She might win, or she might not, but in any event, she's going to go through a lot of hell before there is a settled result.

Even if she prevails fully, it still doesn't change my belief that one is best served by not letting everything hang out, Jerry Springer-style, on Facebook or any other social networking website.

I would bet money that her employment application had questions regarding faith or belief in God. In that case, you've asked the wrong question. The proper question should be: Is an employee who lies during the pre-employment process entitled to keep their job once those lies are exposed?

And she probably would have lost her case of unemployment. The school didn't mention it, and she won unemployment (despite the fact that the school brought in their attorney, unusual in a state unemployment hearing). Certainly lying on her application would be grounds for losing her unemployment claim, and the subsequent appeal (which seems to have been filed by her employer).

If it was, and she answered yes, she lied. And if that is the case, then whomever is defending the school isn't much of a lawyer.

The school lost her unemployment case because they failed to prove misconduct. Specifically, they said they fired her for being a member of Atheist Nexus, a website devoted to those who are free from religion (and this argument should sober all those who are employed and who post non-majority views on the web). Had she lied on her application, I'm quite sure that would have been brought out, and the school would certainly be publicizing that fact.

belief in a higher power. Do you?

http://www.st-edmond.pvt.k12.ia.us/files/665768/Application%20form.pdf

I got the link at the website for St. Edmund's School in Fort Dodge.
http://www.st-edmond.pvt.k12.ia.us/about.cfm

I think this school may be in trouble.

Generally you get a code of conduct and must sign and accept it before you start your first day. Or in the case of contracted employment, an actual contract.

if they have ever even read about an HR department, they'll have one.

The application is important though, but isn't the only governing document.

is what is stupid.

But I think you knew that ;)

It would be similar to a freeper announcing on DU that they love republicans and vote Republican...then acting shocked when they get tombstoned.

and then stating they're against abortion rights.

Remember, all she did was answer a questionnaire saying that she didn't believe in God. That is not the same as announcing a conflict of interest with your employer.

She may not have realized that everyone would see it, but that is exactly what happened.


I suppose there is an outside chance she has a cause of action against the survey company for publishing the results.

In any event, it doesn't matter how the employers learns it.

was asked?

If she answered truthfully, do you think she would have been hired?

If she lied, do you think she's entitled to keep her job after having been found to have lied on her application?

"Nurre said when she was hired at St. Edmonds, she was asked if she was a Catholic. She said she wasn't. At school, she attended Mass and participated in prayer."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-05-29-fired28_ST_N.htm

God?

I bet it did.

Check it out for yourself.
http://www.st-edmond.pvt.k12.ia.us/files/665768/Application%20form.pdf

It doesn't even ask if you're Catholic. I'm pretty sure they're going to have an EEOC investigation to contend with. Yikes.

I could not have been more wrong. I apologize to you, and everyone else whose posts I responded to out of a belief I couldn't back up.

Wow, fuck me. There's this Christian camp in the little burg where I live, and their employment application had a questionaire that asked two whole pages about faith and belief in God.

I hope some of the people I've responded to read this.

Again, I apologize.

:hi:

Job applications are normally very standard and basic and applications are a very small part of the hiring processess, and many companies don't even use them at all. It is normally in the interview that questions of this nature arise. Sometimes not even then and you don't find out what sort of things you can't do publically and remain employed until after you're hired and you get the employee handbook or manual in which there is always a section that covers certain unacceptable public behaviors that are grounds for termination. It's known to the company as the employee contract though they seem to like to call it something else like handbook or manual and I've never seen one that didn't come with a signature page where you agree to abide by what's in it. If she has a teacher contract, it most definitely would be covered in the contract, and the contract is far more important than the job application.

This teacher knew what she said publically was grounds for termination which is why she took pains to hide the information even though she was stupid enough to put it out in the public realm in the first place. There is also no doubt that her religious behavior was important and would have been covered through the hiring process most likely in the interview rather than the application. She attended Catholic mass and participated in prayers because it was a REQUIREMENT, and that requirement as well as other religious requirements would have been gone over during the hiring process though probably not on the application and she would have agreed to abide by their requirements by some sort of contract. At some point during this process she lied about her religious beliefs and essentially breached her contract.

husband is a Catholic school teacher, and he is an observant Catholic. But I don't believe they ever asked him about his religious beliefs at all in the application process.

I honestly don't think it's that big a deal for Catholic schools. I'm surprised this one made the decision to terminate the teacher, though I do think that they have the right to do so. I just don't know many Catholic schools that would make the same choice... pretty much because they would seem bigoted. And if the teacher's good with the students, then that's the most important thing.

The employer chose to argue against her getting employment because she belonged to Atheist Nexus, not because she lied on her application.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-05-29-fired28_ST_N.htm

From the article:

Nurre's case was first reported by The Des Moines Register on Friday detailing her unemployment benefits case, which is public record.

The Register said that during her unemployment hearing, the school's business manager Tim Hancock testified that Nurre had violated the principles of the Catholic church by joining Atheist Nexus.

"She should be denied unemployment benefits for being a member of an atheist Web site," Hancock said.

A judge later ruled that Nurre was entitled to unemployment benefits because the school failed to prove misconduct.

The teacher's job is to teach math, not to teach theology. I don't see how a disbelief in God prevents the teacher from teaching math effectively.

Yeah, I think "conflict of interest" is putting it mildly.

And the math teacher does.

that would be decided upon.

Now the parents that pay the school to educate their kids, well they might have something to say about it though.

That's up to this employer. An employer who happens to believe that faith in God is critical to their job performance.

In fact, the employers exclusive pejorative to decide that is probably spelled out specifically in the employment contract.

All I said was, I don't see how a disbelief in God prevents someone from teaching math effectively.

I'm just pointing out that its really not..at least from an employer/contract point of view.

But since you brought it up, how can we know what is justifiable contractually, when we don't have a copy of the contract?

Pretty standard language in any employer contract or code of conduct.

You have a point though. If they didn't cover themselves then they would have to rely on a judge to agree that religious views are a reasonable requirement to work at a religious school. I could see judges going in different ways.

employer every time they enter their house of worship, yet the school doesn't fire them.

And if it makes a relevant legal distinction.

That's a well known fact- which ranks the woman among the multitude of the stupid who out themselves on facebook.

Including Lutherans, who can hardly be said to uphold Catholic doctrines.

Not arguing whether it's right or wrong- just that it's what church has a well earned reputation for doing.

So, unless she already had a better job lined up- and wanted to bring some media attention to "her cause," she ranks right up there with the stupid.

They can give preference to hiring Catholics, but they can't discriminate against one particular kind of non-Catholic.

And I'll bet a Catholic would call questioning the existence of God on a public forum, harming their mission. They employ non-Catholics but I'll bet they don't knowingly employ atheists.

mesh with the "mission" whether they believe in a higher power or not.

All she did was answer a question on Facebook, claiming that her privacy settings don't allow anyone other than her friends to see her page (there's been a lot of problems with this recently on Facebook actually) and join a group called Atheist nexus. In her unemployment hearing her former employer said, http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-05-29-fired28_ST_N.htm">She should be denied unemployment benefits for being a member of an atheist Web site

Again, all of us should take notice of this. How many of us have bosses, or even employers, who would object to content on DU? Even if you hate and fear atheists, you should defend this woman out of pure self-interest. If an employer can get away with firing this person simply because of a website she belonged to, they could fire anyone.

The bottom line is that NO PUBLIC MONEY WHATSOEVER
should go to religious schools, associations, chuches
or organizations.

If someone wants to send their kid to a madrassa, fine,
but no public money should be allocated for it.

doctrines.

From another article on the topic:
"Nurre said when she was hired at St. Edmonds, she was asked if she was a Catholic. She said she wasn't. At school, she attended Mass and participated in prayer."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-05-29-fired28_ST_N.htm

An employee voices doubt publicly and the Church can't be rid of her fast enough.

On the other hand, when certain priests.... eh, why say it? Everyone knows what I'm talking about.

That's some lesson for the kids.

It's okay to commit rape against children and then deceive, suppress, lie and deny, but it is a fireable offense to be honest.

Just what are they teaching at those Catholic schools? Obviously not values.

Perhaps the hypocritical Catholic leaders should read the damned Bible where it says "Take the plank out of your own eye, before trying to remove the splinter from another's".

but, given that it is a Catholic school and a private one, it DOES have the right to require that its employees, especially teachers, either be Catholic or agree with their doctrine. No one is forcing him to teach at a Catholic school and he knew the requirements going in. He is the one who made the choice to teach there anyway. Many Catholic schools require employees to sign affidavits of agreement with the doctrine and agreeing to certain behaviors prior to beginning work. If that was the case here, then he shouldn't have signed the agreement and begun teaching there if he did not agree with the doctrine.

Now, if this were a public school,then, of course, it would be absolutely illegal and he'd have every right to challenge it to the fullest extent of the law. But it's not. Catholic and private schools do have the right to make their own determinations as to requirements for employees, like it or not.

It just so happens that a group of Catholics are bigots in this case, but certainly there are plenty of other folks who practice religious bigotry.

than being an atheist. I guess we know where the church's priorities lie.

But that is, unfortunately, the way that they are. Which is why, even though I'm a (liberal progressive) Christian, I'd never consider teaching at a Catholic school.

Its a homophobic, bigoted religion, stop making excuses for it, just because something MAY be legal doesn't make it right, and crying for "bigotry" is like a KKK member whining about the same thing.

for them. And, being in the legal field, I well know that "legal" does not always equate to right and just. Far from it. I was simply pointing out that, legally, they are within their rights to do this and that there isn't much that can be done as a result. Frankly, she shouldn't have signed the employment agreement if she knew she wasn't in agreement with their requirements. The Catholic church makes no secret of its doctrine and its requirements in that regard, it shouldn't have been a surprise.

And I have to think that, if this were a Christian who'd been fired by a Muslim school, everyone would be all for it. Religious bigotry takes all kinds of forms. ALL kinds.

its typical, oh, and just an FYI, apparently her employment application made no mention of religion at all, and the school knew she wasn't Catholic.

Nevermind my request upthread. It seems you don't know the definition of oppression well enough to recognise it to give an example.

I label myself as "Unitarian Universalist" on places like Facebook.

:evilgrin: :popcorn:

They are hired to project a certain image. When they faile to do so they are not fulfilling the terms of their contracts.

Words fail me, they really do. Would you have said the same if the teacher in question was fired for being gay?

From the perspective of the Catholic school board, Tiger Woods's actions IS comparable to the actions ofthis teacher who professed atheism.

But I wouldn't compare being gay UNLESS she publicly professed being gay.

Don't mistake my comparison for saying it's right. I'm just saying the perspective is similar.

What if someone working for the NAACP was found to have posted on a website that they believed that whites are genetically superior to all other races. Would anyone here have the slightest problem with that person being dismissed from their job because of their "beliefs"?

Or if someone working for the Human Rights Campaign was discovered to have posted a message indicating that they believed being gay is a matter of choice and that gays can be "cured"? Again, anyone here willing to stick up for that person if they were then fired?

Do I agree with the school? No. Do they have the right to fire the person. Of course.

after all, that's a belief that can interfere with teaching Math, and would be comparable to the examples you gave. Anything besides that has nothing to do with her job, hell her job application didn't even ask if she believed in God. And the school hires Non-Catholics, what excuse could they possibly have to fire her?

you would criticize the NAACP for firing them even though their membership in the KKK doesn't impact their ability to put documents in file folders?

in God with white supremacy. But, to put it more simply, it might affect the clerk's job performance due to conflict of interest, whereas whether someone believes in God or not has no affect on them teaching Math, so no conflict of interest.

She said she didn't believe in god, not that atheists are superior to Xians. A better analogy would be someone who works for the NAACP who, in her private life on her own time, says she doesn't believe there is any such thing as "black" culture, that "black" culture is simply a subset of overall American culture.

If the NAACP has an employee who adheres to a religion that holds white people are genetically superior to everyone else, they could not fire her under Title VII. An employer can't fire someone based on their religious beliefs. In this case, the employer, a Catholic school, found out that the teacher is an atheist through her private associations, not for anything that she did as an employee.

The Human Rights Campaign has employees who practice a religion that holds that gays and lesbians should be punished eternally for the "sin" of engaging in homosexual behavior, and that the only way they can avoid this punishment is to repent and give up sex with . The HRC is not legally entitled to fire these employees either, so long as they are able to keep these religious beliefs from interfering with their work.

about pedophiles as they are about math teachers who don't believe in God.

Private religious schools operate with different standard/requirements than public schools. The teacher stupidly professed her beliefs under her own name, and got shit-canned by the school. Religious organizations are free to get rid of non-religious folks in their employ. She should have realized that when she accepted the job.